Re: issue 4: how to signal support for MOBIKE (correction)

Dondeti, Lakshminath wrote:
> Just wanted to note that a clarification might be in order around the 
> "critical bit" usage.  That would only be applicable if a new payload 
> type were to be defined for MOBIKE signaling, right?
> So, are 3 options on the table: 1) new payload type that might be marked 
> critical 2) vendor ID, and 3) notify payloads?  I think 2 options: 
> vendor ID and notify payloads, would be sufficient for MOBIKE signaling; 
> there is no need for a new payload type for this!

Its hard for me to imagine a situation where we'd want to
fail the connection if the other end does not support
MOBIKE. So for capability discovery we don't want to turn
the critical bit on. And after we have discovered the
capabilities, we can either use or not use the critical
bit, but it should never fail, given a correct implementation.

In any case, this issue was about the capability discovery,
not about how to represent the other MOBIKE messages. We
haven't gone that far yet...

--Jari